The lowers on that Fox dual crown might not have been pure prototype afterall.
Official-appearing Press release here on mtbr
Official-appearing Press release here on mtbr
More Fox DC news.
- Thread starter Incubus
- Start date
I looks much better from this angle
Attachments
lowers look to big in my opinon
Too big for what?
-dAn
Aaah, don't you love the way Fox hypes its products. Next month MBA will have a stellar review of a prototype and by the end of august they'll be testing the production version and again have stellar reviews, before long we'll all be wanting them just like the vanilla, float and talas forks. I really liked my Vanilla aside from the questionable bushing design, if the price of the DH is anywhere in the ball park of a super T it may be my next fork (in 5-6 years that is.)
Hmm... a "sub 7 lb" fork with 40mm stanchions... This should be interesting... 
what are the legs made out of? because they look plastic
Kinda looks cool, could be interesting to see how they perform.
I think the fork looks pretty badass. I would love a fork that can run on a freeride rig, and still have it be light enough for racing.
It has been mentioned before that the only way this could be sub 7lbs is if it were an air fork. Perhaps that is one reason why the stancions are so big. To increase the air volume and give a more linear spring rate.
No air in the forks,
http://www.farkin.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14949 might answer a few questions
http://www.farkin.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=14949 might answer a few questions
it looks good to me...i wonder if they'll make a few different versions at different pricepoints
I like marshmelowsOriginally posted by MikeT
maybe they put marshmelows inside instead of a damping cartridge
Well take a look at the new Maverick forks, its like a sub 5 pound something crazy light, it has 6" adjustable travel, triple clamp. The fork is pretty tuff, diffenetly(sp) would put it on my bike. So add anther 2 pounds or so, I am shure they could have a DH fork in that range.
But I didnt say it was a DH fork, I am saying that the idea is there and it is possible, I mean the fork is like lighter than a Rock Shox Sid, and I would for shure putt it on an all-mountian bike like a foes fxr.
they must have extra light innards cus sub 7 pounds? either they hit the holy grail of chassis design, or everyone else is doing things extreamely wrong...
although this could explain why it took so damn long to develop
although this could explain why it took so damn long to develop
I keep seeing people mention the 40mm stanchions and the fact that this should make the fork heavier. Can anyone explain this to me?
I'm no engineer but I always thought that larger diameter tubes let you make the structure lighter (with increased risk of denting). Isn't this similar to what happened with frames 10 years ago, they were all using tiny little tubes then Cannondale and Klein came out with these huge (for their time) tubesets that were much lighter and stiffer.
Why would forks be different?
I'm no engineer but I always thought that larger diameter tubes let you make the structure lighter (with increased risk of denting). Isn't this similar to what happened with frames 10 years ago, they were all using tiny little tubes then Cannondale and Klein came out with these huge (for their time) tubesets that were much lighter and stiffer.
Why would forks be different?
Is it me or does the arch on that thing look tiny? Looks like it would fit a 2.3" but it would be tight.
What do you all think?
KL
What do you all think?
KL
I don't understand why everyone is so surprised about the weight...Nobody thought the 888 would be that light either. I can see a few secrets to shave weight on that fox...I am sure the 40mm are thin walled...the crowns are milled WAY out, they are not very tall...check out the lowers too...they step down in the center, I am sure they are quite thin there...maybe ti springs too. I wonder if the lower are aluminum, or some unobtanium/magnesium space age conconction....
oh they do look flexy though...
oh they do look flexy though...
check out the other thread and my astute observation....
Well, if it does weigh sub 7lbs, then it might have carbon lowers with either an alu or mag arch and axle area to reduce weight. It could also have a cartridge system similar to an 888 to reduce weight and use less oil.
Seems reasonable to me, but I highly doubt that it uses the same damping system at the Vanilla forks.
Seems reasonable to me, but I highly doubt that it uses the same damping system at the Vanilla forks.
my initial impressions are that pretty good
looks pretty much on par with 888 except lighter, adjustable travel and lower axle to crown distance
pretty mych most of the things ppl didnt like in the 888
any way i guess its time now to see how this baby rides rather then speculate
it gets the thumbs up from me atm.
looks pretty much on par with 888 except lighter, adjustable travel and lower axle to crown distance
pretty mych most of the things ppl didnt like in the 888
any way i guess its time now to see how this baby rides rather then speculate
it gets the thumbs up from me atm.
to me it looks a lot like a boxxer on steroids
anyways did anybody read the press release?
this fork has a new brake mounting "standard"
not that we didn't have enough "standards" for that already
i like it though!
anyways did anybody read the press release?
this fork has a new brake mounting "standard"
not that we didn't have enough "standards" for that already
i like it though!
....the real question is:
"Will you be able to run an 8" rotor without voiding the warranty?"...........:devil:
"Will you be able to run an 8" rotor without voiding the warranty?"...........:devil:
yeah i was wondering too 40 mm stancions and sub-7 lbs? hm.....
I don't think it's a new Standard per say; it's really just using an existing XC standard and by spacing it further out they eliminate the need for big DH adapters.Originally posted by UiUiUiUi
to me it looks a lot like a boxxer on steroids
anyways did anybody read the press release?
this fork has a new brake mounting "standard"
not that we didn't have enough "standards" for that already
i like it though!
I'll believe sub-7lbs when I see it. Have they incorporated their platform valving into it?
here
it works well and they paint it some other color than Primer gray.
Oh you know what they say.... primer gray is the new Root Beer.
the lowers actually do look like they're made out of plastic.
So what's the fascination with right-side up forks nowadays? Is it that much easier to make a lighter fork that's not inverted?? Or is this another trend we're seeing in DH riding.
Oh boy, one fork that can be used on so many different types of bikes! How's that for thinkin'?!
Hmmm...6" with 40mm stantions and reasonable weight...mmmmmmmaybe I would reconsider my "DC forks only belong on long-travel bikes" philosophy. That fork would be right at home on my RFX. Maybe. :devil:
Hmmm...6" with 40mm stantions and reasonable weight...mmmmmmmaybe I would reconsider my "DC forks only belong on long-travel bikes" philosophy. That fork would be right at home on my RFX. Maybe. :devil:
I wish that Marzocchi didn't have a strong-hold on the freeride fork market so that Fox could jump in with a freeride fork.
My problem is... I just don't think I could keep stachions on a right side up fork clean. The upper tubes on my Shiver are scrathed up really bad in places and I thank my lucky stars that it wasn't the stanchions on my brand new Fox DH fork or other.